Category: Uncategorized

Born in 1890, Going for Haj in 2010: India’s Munni Begum ready for pilgrimage
Munni Begum is 120 year old and is all set to go for Haj, after special permission as her name didn’t figure in the draw of lots.

The old woman who gave birth to eight sons and daughters, heads a huge family that lives in Kho Nagorian locality of Jaipur.

Family members say that Munni Begum was born in August 1890. She has 52 grandsons and granddaughters apart from 96-odd great grandsons and great granddaughters other than two dozen great-great-grandchildren [and even their kids].
The elderly woman has seen three centuries. And now she is all set for the pilgrimage she has waited for all her life. On Saturday she reached the office of Haj Committee to fill the form. The Central Haj Committee officials from Delhi gave her special permission.

The Rajasthan Haj Welfare Society has requested the Saudia Arabia government that special attention should be paid to her because of Munni’s age.

Munni Begum is perhaps the oldest woman on record to embark for the holy journey. She says that she had the wish to go for Haj ever since she was married in her teenage, and thus her wish is going to be fulfilled after over a century.
One wonders if there is a tendency among the Rajasthanis, particularly, the Jaipur residents to live longer.

Earlier, Habib Miyan had gone for Haj at the age of 134. He had suddenly drawn international attention after it was found that he had been drawing pension for over 65 years.

Habib Miyan had retired in 1938. He went for Haj in 2004 when he was 134. Though birth certificates were unknown in the olden days, the bank records proved his age.

As per the pension papers, Habib Miyan was drawing pension since 1938. The documents clearly showed him as born in 1878 and this made him the world’s oldest man alive until his death at the age of 138 in 2008. The bank officers delivered his pension at his home.

Now it’s Munni Begum’s turn though she is not a ‘Munni’ in the literary sense. [Munni means little in Urdu] In India, it was the tradition that mostly older persons went for Haj, after they had fulfilled their worldly responsibilities.

In recent years the pilgrims have begun going at a comparatively younger age, still a large number of Indians who go to Hejaz [Arabia] are over sixty. And Munni Begum clearly beats them as well. One hopes that along with other Hajis, she also manages to perform the Haj and returns safely. Amen.

Tim Coles takes us through 11 steps necessary to create a “terrorist state”. Using Yemen as a case study, he argues that these steps precisely match US and British policies in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iran as well as Yemen to grow “very poisonous seeds”, some which have ripened while others are ripening.

So, you want to create your own terrorist state, do you? Follow these simple instructions and you will be able to grow “very poisonous seeds. These seeds are growing now. Some have ripened and others are ripening,” as Eqbal Ahmad explained.

In 2002, the Bush administration’s National Security Strategy (NSS) made it clear that America, with Britain’s help, intends to increase terrorism by chasing terrorists around the world instead of capturing them, or, better still, addressing their grievances – this is the real world, after all, which is dominated by financial interests, so there’s no time for rational solutions here.

The NSS reads: “The United States and countries cooperating with us must not allow the terrorists to develop new home bases. Together, we will seek to deny them sanctuary at every turn.”

The policy of giving terrorists no “haven”, rather than working to end terrorism, gives the US and Britain the excuse to “fight and decisively win multiple, simultaneous major theatre wars” by chasing terrorists around the globe and, more worryingly, to actually cause terrorism.

When terrorism occurs, Britain and America then have the perfect excuse to invade, isolate, impose sanctions on and/or corrupt the given country, as we see in Pakistan, Iran and elsewhere. Under Obama, this horrendous pretext to achieve “full spectrum dominance” was expanded.

So, here is how to create your own terrorist State, using Yemen as an example. This will come in handy as a pretext to invade or impose sanctions on the country of your choosing later on as a continuation of your plans for “full spectrum dominance”.

Step 1:Make sure you have a media and an education system sophisticated enough to omit what your country does to others, but emphasize what other countries do to you.

This will enable your domestic population to hate the people of the other country, allowing you to pursue your agenda without the risk of being overthrown by your own population. In 2002-03, unprecedented numbers of protestors demonstrated in London against the Iraq war. This could be dangerous for future wars because the public might one day try to overthrow you. Therefore, domestic subversion is also a good tactic if you can do it.

Step 2:Select a country that has suffered under your colonial rule in the past. Aden, now Yemen, was occupied by the British in 1839. In 1947, the Amir of Dhala’s son, Haidan, led an uprising which was crushed with overwhelming firepower from Britain’s Royal Air Force. In a study for the RAND Corporation, Bruce Hoffman explained:

“No sooner than the threat from Haidan been neutralized than trouble erupted from another tribe, in the nearby village of Al Husein… Once again punishment was applied from the air. Four Mosquitoes and three Tempests from No. 8 Squadron were ordered to destroy the village. The rocket and cannon air strike, the after-action report stated, “was most impressive and awe-inspiring, and the attack undoubtedly made an impression not easily forgotten.”

Step 3:

Make sure that your selected country has a neighbour across the sea, or on its border, which has also suffered under your colonial rule. You will need to do this for Step 7 later on. In 1925, the colonial administrator, Douglas Jardine, not to be confused with the cricketer, explained the geostrategic importance of Aden and British Somaliland, now Somalia:

“Berbera, the capital [of Somaliland], is but 160 miles across the Gulf from Aden, and is, therefore, but 12 days distance from London and six from Bombay. It cannot be said that this proximity to our main imperial trade route has been of much benefit to the protectorate in the past; but it might prove at any time to be of incalculable value.”

Indeed, it turned out “to be of incalculable value”. Another colonialist, H.B. Kittermaster, explained: “The dry coastal climate makes the [Somaliland] Protectorate as good as Aden for the production of salt. This is already being done in a primitive way by the natives, and negotiations are now in progress with a British syndicate to develop the industry scientifically.”

Today, the countries are more generally used along the oil trading routes.

Step 4:Now that you have chosen a country, in close proximity to its exploited neighbour, you’ll want to ensure that the suffering inflicted upon it had continued throughout the course of, say, one hundred years. This is long enough to foster intergenerational resentment and hatred of your own country. Britain’s “establishment of the Middle East Command (MEC) headquarters in Aden in 1960 helped fuel the fires of revolution”, Stephen Dorril explained in his history of MI6.

“The 1962 Defence White Paper, “The Next Five Years”, stated that Britain would continue to back the local sultans in South Yemen and the Gulf, and that the Aden base would be the permanent headquarters of this strategy… Aden was to be one of the three key points in Britain’s global military deployment… Fifty thousand Lee Enfield rifles were shipped from the UK to Yemeni royalists. According to the 21st SAS Volunteers Commander Richard Pirie, the mercenaries deployed in Yemen were paid GBP 250 per month from the Foreign Office and from the MoD [Ministry of Defence].”

British and Scottish mercenaries were paid GBP 100,000 a year to launch a chemical war against the population which resulted in the slaughter of 200,000 Yemenis, largely in defence of what was then an oil refinery run by the British.

Step 5:Now that you have fostered enough resentment and ruined a country’s chance of socio-economic recovery, you might want to try betraying even the mercenary elements of that country attempting to side with you. In 1979, America and Britain began funding, arming and training the Afghan mujahideen in order “to draw the Russians into the Afghan trap”, to quote US President Jimmy Carter’s national security advisor, Zbigniew Brzezinski.

This worked. Russia and the mujahideen ruined Afghanistan – and out of the ashes rose the Taliban, whom Britain and America supported almost up to 9/11. Britain’s leading independent terror specialist, Jason Burke, documented how many of the more fascistic elements of the mujahideen were Yemenis who “had distinguished themselves at the battle of Jalalabad in 1989”. By 1992, however, the US had not supported those factions who were outraged by the intricacies of the unification of the Yemen Arab Republic and the People’s Democratic Republic of Yemen.

Step 6:Capture and torture people from all over the world in a prison such as Guantanamo Bay. Deny them habeas corpus: no charge; no trial; no representation; no right to a lawyer; no right to visits from friends, relatives or the Red Cross; and do so for an indefinite period.

Select people whose religion is the same as those in the terrorist state you are looking to create (in this case Islam). This will create a sense a kinship among those you are turning into enemies. This will make the enemies seem more closely knit, yet from varying countries, giving your country the excuse to invade country after country. Also, use your media to dehumanize the captives, making them seem guilty without evidence.

Once you have traumatized those prisoners of the same religion – which your education system regards as incompatible with modernity – release them to the country you wish to turn into a terrorist state. They may all get together and plot revenge which you can then use to justify attacking the country. In 2009, Barack Obama began releasing former Guantanamo Bay hostages to Yemen.

Step 7:Destroy the stabilizing government of the neighbouring country. In 2006, Britain and America supported Somali warlords, such as Abdullah Yusuf, who invaded Somalia in order to overthrow the emerging government (the Union of Islamic Courts) and replace them with a fascist government nobody wanted (the Transitional Federal Government, or TFG). The TFG then launched a campaign of famine, torture and violence so extreme that hundreds of thousands of Somalis fled across the sea to seek refuge in Yemen, with tens of thousands fleeing each year.

Once you have ruined the neighbouring country, poor, displaced, oppressed, Muslim refugees will flock to the country you are trying to turn into a terrorist state (Yemen). Here, clerics in madrassas [religious schools] will have a constituency of desperate people whom they can radicalize and turn into future terrorists, as happened in Pakistan in the 1980s when millions of Afghans fled from Soviet troops and the mujahideen (as we saw in Step 5), many of whom became the Taliban in the early 1990s.

Step 8:Murder people without charge or trial in both countries with new, super-weaponry, such as Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (drones). This will terrorize and radicalize the population of the country you are trying to turn into a terrorist state. Hopefully, your media will attempt to vindicate the drone attacks by either not reporting them or else uncritically quoting officials who claim that the drones target terrorists. Without journalists challenging these official statements, the public may assume that they are correct. (This is happening in more and more countries: Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iraq, Palestine, Yemen, Somalia and possibly even Haiti).

Step 9:Omit as much of the previous steps as you can from public knowledge via the media and education system of your own country. This will make any action from the country you are trying to turn into a terrorist state seem unprovoked, giving you the chance to invade as an act of self-defence. It will also allow you to carry on without your public overthrowing you (as mentioned in Step 1). Also, get your media to make meaningless statements about the country you are trying to turn into a terrorist state, such as “Osama Bin Laden’s grandfather was born there”, or “the failed Christmas underpants bomber (Umar Farouk Abdulmuttallab) was radicalized there by the cleric Anwar Al-Awlaqi” – even though Abdulmuttallab’s father informed the FBI of his son’s radicalization months before, which the FBI ignored – or, “Nidal Malik Hasan, the major who killed several of his colleagues at a US base, was radicalized there” – even though this was not terrorism because they were military targets.

Step 10:Wait for a terrorist attack to occur, in the country itself, against a British national stationed there, such as an ambassador who had previously worked in another country you helped to destroy.

When the British ambassador to Yemen, Tim Torlot (who had worked for the British government in Iraq) was attacked in April 2010, the “left” and “right” media leapt at the chance to emphasize how dangerous Yemen is to Britain (for which we planned in Step 1).

Careful reading shows that few newspapers actually revealed their sources. The Independent revealed a source, namely that the Yemeni Interior Ministry said the attack “bore all the hallmarks of Al-Qaeda”, but as Britain and America are training and funding the Yemeni government and secret services, any information provided by them is biased. The Independent also revealed that the primary sources for the incident are “Yemeni newspapers [which] cite anonymous security sources” to name the bomber as Osman Ali Noman Asaloi. In other words, it could be a total fabrication.

The Guardian alleged that some Al-Qaeda members fled Yemen to Somalia via Aden. Perhaps they bumped into the tens of thousands of refugees fleeing from the Western-backed Transitional Federal Government?

The Times reported that “no group claimed responsibility for the attack”, yet the press, basing their information on the Yemeni government, blamed Al-Qaeda. The Times also admitted that “terrorism is merely a symptom of Yemen’s overwhelming problems”, but did not mention that they began in 1839, when Britain invaded, and continue up to the present. This emphasizes the importance of Step 2.

The Telegraph reported: “The Interior Ministry later stated: “This operation reflects the state of despair which has hit the terrorists after the painful pre-emptive strikes which they received in their hideouts at the hands of security services”, which are being trained and funded by the US and Britain, one might add, but this offers no evidence that the victims are “terrorists”.

Step 11:Now sit back and wait for the country to boil over into extreme violence, making sure you poke the bear with sticks, such as increased drone attacks and security raids by the puppet government being armed and trained by your own.

After a few years, you will have yourself a nice terrorist state. Later, academics can refer to the country as a “failed state”, perhaps even invoking your “Responsibility to Protect” (R2P), omitting, of course, exactly why it has become a “failed state” and why one needs to exercise R2P. While your domestic population assumes that you are either incompetent or out there to combat terrorism, you can secure energy routes or raw resources. As Liam Fox, the defence secretary of the 2010 Liberal Democrat-Conservative “coalition” government, explained:

“In the years ahead energy security, economic security and national security will be inextricably linked. If we want to ensure that we can keep the lights on in Britain then we need to develop a comprehensive energy strategy. It is simply a matter of risk management. Such a strategy will need to have three components: diversity in the type of fuels we use; diversity in the geographical sources of those fuels; and the security structures that will guarantee the safe transport of these fuels.”

The brilliant kalaam scholars said: “The one that likened Aļļaah to His creation, or ascribed a hand to Him (i.e. in the sense of a part or limb) or a child; what he worships is not Aļļaah, even if he called it Aļļaah.”

The saying of the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وسلم) “let the first you call them to be the worship of Aļļaah, then when they know Aļļaah tell them…” etc.

Al-Qaađii ˆIiaađ (رحمه الله) said: “This (i.e. the foregoing statement of the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وسلم))indicates that they (the Christians) do not know Aļļaah, and this is the saying of the brilliant kalaam scholars regarding the jews and the Christians; that they do not know Aļļaah (تعالى) even if they worship Him (i.e. call what they worship by His name) and making it appear as if they know Him, based on what they narrate amongst themselves, even though it is not impossible in the mind’s eye that someone who disbelieves in a messenger does know Aļļaah.”

Al-Qaađii ˆIiaađ (رحمه الله) said: The one that likened Aļļaah to His creation, or believed Him to be bodily among the jews and Christians, or believed that He gains knowledge over time, or claimed He has a child, or a female companion and a child, or said he could exist in created things, or move from one place to another, or be mixed with creation, among the Christians or attributed to Him what is not befitting, or associated with Him a partner or opponent in creating among the Magians an dualists; what they worship is not Aļļaah, even if they called it that. This is because it is not attributed with the attributes that are necessarily His. Accordingly, they do not know Aļļaah (سبحانه), so realize this point well, and depend on it, and I have seen this point made by our predecessor shaykhs.”

“Proofs tell us that the who says that God is a body is a disbeliever in God (who is greatly above and clear of flaws). The reason is that the God of the World exists, and He is not a body, or stationed in a body. So if the one who believes that God is a body denies this non-bodily existence, then he has disbelieved in God Himself. This means that the disagreement between the one that believes that God is a body, and the monotheist (i.e. in the Islamic sense, namely that God does not have a partner, part or a like in His self of attributes), is not based on a disagreement regarding attributes, but regarding the self (i.e. the identity of the one attributed with godhood.) It is sound to say then, that the one who believes that God is a body does not believe in Aļļaah….

As for the ĥuluuliyyah (those who believe that Aļļaah settles in created things, such as the sky or a human body) and ĥuruufiyyah (those who believe that Aļļaah’s attribute of kalam/speech consists of letters and sounds) sects,we say that they are unequivocally disbelievers. This is because Aļļaah declared the christians blasphemers for believing that Aļļaah’s speech entered into Jesus, whereas the ĥuruufiyyah believe that it settles in the tongue of all those who recite Qur’aan, and in all physical things that the Qur’aan was written on. Accordingly, if the belief in its settlement in one single body (Jesus) is blasphemy, then it is even more blasphemous to believe that it settles in all shapes and bodies.”

As-Subkiyy calls them idol worshipers:

As-Subkiyy in his Tabaqaatu-sħ-Sħaafiˆiyyatu-l-Kubraa says regarding scripture texts that appear to be referring to bodily attributes:

“the saying of the mujassimah(anthropomorphists), worshipers of the idol, makes them always focus on ambiguous aayahs.”

Al-Qurţubiyy and Ibn Al-ˆArabiyy

الصحيح القول بتكفيرهم ، إذ لا فرق بينهم وبين عباد الأصنام والصور.

Similarly, Al-Qurtubīy in his commentary in the Qur’ān narrates from his Shaykh Ibn Al-’Arabīy regarding the, those who say Allāh has a body: “The sound verdict is that they are blasphemers, because there is no difference between them and those that worship idols and pictures.”

TEL AVIV
“A dwindling water supply in the Sea of Galilee is pushing Israel to increase its use of desalination plants, with plans to expand two facilities and build two more by 2010. The biblical body of water is 16.2 feet below its lower “red line,” which marks the point at which it is ecologically inadvisable to draw water, according to the Israeli Water Authority.”

The Ahlu’s Sunnah scholars have described criteria and conditions that are to be met before someone can be ruled an apostate.

(1) Takallum – that a particular statement was certainly said;
(2) Kalam – that such a statement is certainly blasphemous;
(3) Mutakallim – that such a statement was certainly said by the person.

When there is not the frailest doubt [or misunderstanding] in any of the criteria above OR when there is not an acceptable explanation, only then can a ruling of apostacy be issued. This is the same for both actions and words [amounting to blasphemy]. This principle can be understood by a simple example. If Zayd claims to be a Muslim, then the ruling of apostacy [takfeer] can be issued only if he denies or contravenes any necessary article of faith either through his words or his actions and such a denial or contravention has:

(1) indeed occurred
(2) such words or actions are indeed blasphemous
(3) such words or actions are indeed proved to be that of Zayd.

And only when all three aspects above are conclusively proven and ascertained, the ruling of apostacy [takfeer] can be pronounced for Zayd.

The unambiguous position of the scholars of Ahlu’s Sunnah concerning the leaders of Deoband and their infamous statements is that: any person who has complete knowledge of these statements and clear understanding of those statements, and yet, does not consider such people as disbelievers is a disbeliever himself. That is, being fully cognizant of the issue and complete understanding of those statements is a necessary condition for ruling the second person [the follower or admirer of Deobandi elders] an apostate.

The doctrine and the actions of Ahlu’s Sunnah are those which have been handed down from the time of the Prophet and his companions [Sahabah] to their successors [Tabiyeen] and that which have been documented in the books of tafseer, hadith, fiqh, tasawwuf, seerah and tareekh. The writings and speeches of the scholars of Farangi Mahal, Lucknow, Khayrabad, Badayun and Bareilly conform to this very set of beliefs. They are the true spokesmen of the teachings and opinions of scholars like Shaykh Abdul Haq Muhaddith Dihlawi (d. 1052 AH) and Shah Abdul Aziz Muhaddith Dihlawi (d. 1239 AH) who are the true heirs of Islamic scholars. They do not accept nor even contemplate novel ideas that contradict Islamic doctrine. They hold fast unto the doctrine propounded and promulgated by the elders; they consider this to be a precious gift and a path for their own salvation and that of other Muslims.

Imam Ahmed Raza Barelwi in his fatawa – like other scholars of Ahlu’s Sunnah – has enjoined Muslims to be steadfast in their belief and better their social standing. These are available as small booklets and following are the subjects of his fatawa :

– Shari’ah is the ultimate law and following it is obligatory for all Muslims;

– to refrain from Bid’ah is of utmost importance

– a Sufi without knowledge or a Shaykh without actions is a joke of the devil;

– it is impermissible to imitate the Kuffar, to mingle with the misguided [and heretics] and to participate in the festivals of the Hindus.

– it is polytheism [shirk] to prostrate to any other than Allah táālā with the intention of worship. And if such a prostration is out of reverence [sajdah at-taĥiyyah], it is Haram.

– it is prohibited to ridicule other muslims and consider oneself higher than others.

– the iconography of the Shi`ah [ta’aziyah] and respecting such icons is forbidden

– Qawwali [sama’a] with musical instruments is forbidden

– it is not permissible for women to travel to visit graves [or maqams of awliya]

– it is not permissible to make pictures of living things.

– abbreviating the blessing ‘sallallahu ‘alaihi wasallam’ to an acronym ‘sa’d lam ayn meem’, [in english it is abbreviated as PBUH] is impermissible

– to visit fake graves [that have no basis or record but simply the product of folklore] is impermissible

– feeding the poor and needy with the intention to donate the reward to the dead is permissible; but to hold obsequies and banquets where even the rich are invited is impermissible

For further details, see my book, “Imam Ahmed Raza aur Radd e Bid’aat-o-Munkaraat”, [Imām Aĥmed Rida and his refutation of heresies and innovations] published in India and Pakistan.

He had the same opinion like that of the Sawad al-A’dham (the great majority) of the Ahlu’s Sunnah wal Jama’ah; similar to that of the scholars of Badayun, Khairabad, Bareilly, the masters of Marahra and Kichaucha with regards to the following practices and beliefs are permissible:

– that intercession [tawassul] of the Prophets and saints is permissible

– to respect relics of the prophets and elders and to rever them

– visit shrines or graves of saints with the intention of tawassul

– to celebrate ‘Urs which is free from impermissible practises and sin

– to celebrate the birthday of the prophet şallAllāhu álayhi wa sallam [Mawlid, Qiyam] and to stand up in his honor

– to donate reward of good deeds to the dead [Fatiha and Isaal al-Thawab] etc.

These are practices permitted by our predecessors and even today, 90% of the Muslims of the world practice these actions.

The newly published Arabic book, Mafaheem Yajib an Tusahhaha [2] [Matters that need to be Clarified], by the late Sayyid Muhammad bin Alawi ibn Abbas al-Maliki al-Makki is a detailed exposition and research on the practices of the Ahlu’s Sunnah. Many contemporary Arab and African scholars have endorsed this book, many of whom are the members of Raabta al-‘Aalam-e-Islami, Makka. I have translated this book into Urdu by the name of Islah-e-Fikr-o-I’ytiqad, which has been published both in India and Pakistan.

Sayyid Muhammad Faruq al-Qadri, the Urdu translator of Anfas al-‘Arifeen, an important book on taşawwuf among the followers of Shah Waliyullah, writes the following about the practices of Ahlu’s Sunnah:

It is ironic that the first thing that disrupted the peaceful environment of the Subcontinent was a member of this prominent family [of Shah Waliyullah] – Shah Muhammad Ismay’il and his Taqwiyatul Iman. His thought was unacceptable, his beckoned towards a strange idea and his way of invitation was warlike.

I have seen a list of 250 books written as a rebuttal to Taqwiyatul Iman in various languages as soon as it was published. From this, one can surmise the reaction towards this book amongst both ordinary Muslims and scholars.

We have no proof to say that all the scholars, Sufis and ordinary Muslims were steeped in polytheism and heresy [Shirk and Bid’ah] and that Shah Muhammad Isma’il was enlightening the nation and introducing them to real Tawĥīd for the first time.

After all, what is the time gap between Shah Waliyullah, Shah Abdul Aziz and Shah Muhammad Isma’il?

Had the entire Subcontinent been engulfed in Kufr and Shirk in this very short period?

And if it was already afflicted with Shirk and Kufr, then why did Hakeem al-Ummah Shah Waliullah and Shah Abdul Aziz not use the same harsh language [as Shah Isma’il]?

The reality of the matter is that, the first voice that erred from the creed of Sawad al-A’dhamor the Great Majority that shook the Subcontinent was that of Shah Isma’il. Certainly, this can be termed as an invitation to the movement of Muhammad bin Abdu’l Wahhab an-Najdi but it surely not a call towards the thought or practices of Shah Waliyullah.”[3]

The movement to protect the Ahlu’s Sunnah and to reinstill the respect of the Prophet in the hearts of Muslims, was led by the scholars of Khairabad, Badayun and Bareilly. This movement came into prominence as an answer to the Wahabi movement and was greatly aided by the Imam of the Ahlu’s Sunnah, Maulana Ahmed Raza Hanafi Qadri Barkati Barelwi (d. 1340 AH, 1921 CE) whose immense knowledge and outstanding leadership saw to it that the creed of Ahlu’s Sunnah, the creed of our predecessors, our elder scholars prevailed.

A brief list of scholars, institutions and publishing houses that belong to the Ahlu’s Sunnah is in order.

The focal point of all these institutions is, “Oh Allah! Guide us upon the straight path. The path of those whom Thou hast favoured; not those who have earned Your anger and those gone astray”.

A few of the awliya in the subcontinent, may Allāh be pleased with them:

Hazrat Daata Ganj Bakhsh Hujweri Lahori

Hazrat Khwaja Muyinuddin Chishti Ajmeri

Hazrat Shaykh Bahauddin Zakariya Multani

Hazrat Khwaja Fariduddin Ganj Shakar

Hazrat Khwaja Qutbuddin Bakhtyar Kaki

Hazrat Makhdoom ‘Alauddin Ali Ahmad Sabir Kalyari

Hazrat Mahboob-e-Ilahi Nizamuddin Awliya

Hazrat Sharfuddin Yahya Muneeri

Hazrat Makhdoom Jahaniyan Jahan Gasht

Ameer Kabeer Hazrat Sayyid Ali Hamdani

Hazrat Makhdoom Sayyid Ashraf Jahangir Samnani

Hazrat Shaykh Abdul Haq Muhaddith Dihlawi

Hazrat Mujaddid Alf e Thani Shaykh Ahmad Faruqi Sarhandi

Muslims following in their footsteps attain high ranks and immense favour of Allāh táālā even to this day. These are the pure souls who enlightened the subcontinent with the blessing of Islam and faith, and made it an epicentre of light.

Ahlu’s Sunnah wa’l Jama’ah – An Introduction

The Holy Prophet (sallal laahu alaihi wasallam) said: “Allah will never allow my Ummah to unite upon misguidance and incorrect beliefs. Allah’s mercy, blessings and protection are with the largest group of Muslims. And he who deviates from this largest group of Muslims will be thrown into Hell.”

(Tirmizi)

—

“…The Prophet(Sallal Laahu Alaihi Wasallam) remarked:

“Leave him, as his slaying will serve no good purpose, as he is not the only individual but there are a host of others like him and if you compare their prayers and fasting to that of yours, you yourself will feel ashamed.

These are the people who will recite the Quran but it will not go beyond their throats, with all these apparent virtues they will leave the fold of Deen just like the arrow leaves the bow.”

In the previous pages, the references and the passages of the leaders of Deoband are based upon misguidance and Kufr

(Copies of the original passages can be seen in “Da’wat e Fikr” by Maulana Muhammad Mansha Tabish Qasauri).

These passages harm the Islamic doctrine about Allah and the sanctity of Prophethood.

These were the root cause of the division among the Muslims of India and this land became a battleground for sectarianism, the effects of which can be seen even today in every village, town and city, destroying the very soul of Islam.

The movement to preserve the sanctity and sacredness of Prophethood and protection of the creed of the Ahlus Sunnah was aided by many great scholars who played a vital role.

Foremost among them was, Muhibbu’r Rasool Taaju’l Fuhool Maulana Abdul Qadir Uthmani Qadri Barkati Badayuni (son of ‘Allama Fazl e Rasool Uthmani Qadri Barkati Badayuni), student of ‘Allama Fazl e Haq Khairabadi who was the student of Shah Abdul Aziz Muhaddith Dihlawi and secondly Imam e Ahl e Sunnat Maulana Ahmad Raza Hanafi Qadri Barkati Barelwi (son of ‘Allama Naqi Ali Barelwi), Khalifa of Maulana Sayyid Shah Aal e Rasool Qadri Barkati Marahrawi who was the student of Shah Abdul Aziz Muhaddith Dihlawi. These two personalities, in their own era, played an important role. They both had Bay’ah and also Ijazah and Khilafah from Marahra Mutahhara (Eta, U.P.) and their allegiance was always to the luminaries of Marahra Mutahhara.

“The love of the Prophet sallallahu ‘alaihi wasallam was the prime focus in his life. All his sayings and actions were steeped in love for the Prophet sallallahu ‘alaihi wasallam that it can be said that, he was, from head to toe, immersed in the love of Rasoolullah sallallahu ‘alaihi wasallam. Love of the Prophet sallallahu ‘alaihi wasallam was his life and that was his message.”

It is worth noting here that his love was not a kind of madness where all sense of judgment is lost; rather, his love bound him to comply with the wishes of the beloved sallallahu ‘alaihi wasallam. This is the state in love, where a man’s own wishes are vanquished and he becomes a follower of the wishes of his beloved.

This is the state mentioned in the hadith : ‘that a man’s desires are compliant with that [message] which I have come with.’ [wa an yakunu hawāhu tab’an limaa jiytu bihi]

This aspect is reflected in all his religious services and efforts. His book, Maqal e ‘Urafa’ bi I’zaz e Shar’a wa ‘Ulema is sufficient to demonstrate this. In this book he has shown the loftiness of the Shari’ah, and has eloquently refuted those freethinking Sufis who oppose it. He has strongly refuted rituals and actions that anti-Shari’ah in his books and urged Muslims to abstain from them.

For example, visiting fake graves, visiting of graves by women, festivals and fairs during an ‘Urs, prostration of reverence and making Ta’zia [icons to commemorate the martyrdom of Ahl al-Bayt]. He has strongly advised and urged Muslims to abstain from such rituals.[1]

(1) Imam Ahmad Raza Muhaddith Barelwi considered it to be contrary to adab [respect] to use words or phrases loosely, when referring to Allah ta’ala or the Prophets; because even though the literal meaning might seem correct, they still remain disrespectful.

Whereas the authors of these books claim that these words should not be taken in the sense that is disrespectful; because even according to them, disrespect is Haram. But the standpoint of Muhaddith Barelwi is that because the passages in these books are in common speech [Urdu].The default meaning is that which is commonly understood by the native Urdu speaker. Therefore, the ruling will be according to such a meaning [not the abstruse one, which can be extracted].

(2) Secondly, Muhaddith Barelwi believed that the praise mentioned about the Prophet sallallahu ‘alaihi wasallam in the Qur’an and Hadith should be taken as it is reported and disseminated likewise so that the status and rank of the Prophet sallallahu ‘alaihi wasallam is known to Muslims and their hearts are filled with his love and respect.

However, the Ulema of Deoband chose to be overly cautious in this regard because they believed that this could cause Muslims to transgress the limits.

(3) Muhaddith Barelwi was of the opinion that celebrating the birthday of the Prophet sallallahu ‘alaihi wasallam was permissible and desirable, whereas the scholars of of Deoband were against it.

(4) Muhaddith Barelwi considered Qiyam [to stand in respect] to be a praiseworthy act in the gatherings of Mawlid an-Nabi sallallahu ‘alaihi wasallam whereas the scholars of Deoband considered this to be Bid’ah or an innovation.

(5) Muhaddith Barelwi considered ‘Urs to be permissible (as long as these gatherings did not contravene the Shari’ah) whereas the scholars of Deoband considered them to be impermissible.

(6) Fatiha [donating the
reward to deceased] was considered permissible by Muhaddith Barelwi [again as long as it did not have any element against Shari`ah] but the scholars of Deoband considered it to be impermissible.

A few paragraphs later, Prof. Muhammad Mas’ud Ahmad writes:

The Spiritual Master and Murshid of the elders of Deoband, Haji Imdadullah Muhajir Makki, had the same opinions as Muhaddith Barelwi did; and he wrote a monograph, Faisla Haft Mas’ala to unite these two groups. However, the Ulema of Deoband did not accept his views.[2]

From the Salaf (predecessors) to the Khalaf (their successors) it is an unanimous belief that disrespect towards the Prophet sallallahu ‘alaihi wasallam is a gross crime and manifest Kufr. The Qur’an, Hadith and the sayings of the Sahaba and Tabi’een form the evidence for this ruling.The Shaykh-ul-Hadith of Darul Uloom Deoband, Maulana Husain Ahmad Tandwi, writes concerning the issue:

“Disrespecting the Prophet sallallahu ‘alaihi wasallam is Kufr. Never mind clear disrespect, even if a person utter words that [are ambiguous and hence] might resemble disrespect, even this will cause it to be ruled Kufr.” [3]

Similarly,Ilhad and Zandaqah are also Kufr; and after Shar’i proof is obtained, it is obligatory to rule someone an apostate [Takfeer] who denies a matter deemed among the necessities of faith. Maulana Ameen Ahsan Islahi from Madrasatul Islah (Azamgarh, U.P.) writes in a letter:

“Maulana Thanwi’s fatwa has been published that Maulana Shibli Nu’mani and Maulana Hamiduddin Farahi are Kafir and because the Madrasatul Islah is part of their mission, it is a Madrasa of Kufr and apostacy up to the stage that those Ulema who attend the missionary gatherings of the Madrasa they too are Mulhid and non-Muslims.”[4]

When the mureed and Khalifa of Maulana Ashraf Ali Thanwi, Maulana Abdul Majid Daryabadi, wrote a letter to Maulana Thanwi which consisted of praise for Maulana Shibli Nu’mani and Maulana Farahi’s knowledge, their piety and their religious services, Maulana Thanwi replied by writing:

“These are all actions (a’maal). Belief (‘aqaid) is a separate entity to this. Good beliefs can be coupled with bad actions just as bad beliefs can be coupled with good actions.”[5]

The scholars of Ahlu’s Sunnah defended the sanctity of Prophethood and they performed a Jihad against attacks on established beliefs. Following in their footsteps, the Imam of Ahlu’s Sunnah, Maulana Imam Ahmad Raza Hanafi Qadri Barkati Barelwi protected the creed of the Ahlus Sunnah with his pen; Books like Kanz al-Iman fi Tarjumat al-Qur’an, Al-‘Ataya al-Nabawiya fi al-Fatawa al-Ridawiyya, Jadd al-Mumtar ‘ala Radd al-Muhtar, Hadayiq-e-Bakhshish and Al-Daulat al-Makkiyah are proof of his efforts to ward of the mischief. As a part of this service are his Fatawa al-Haramain Bi Rajafi Nadwat al-Mayn (1317 AH, 1899 CE), Al-Mu’tamad al-Mustanad (1320 AH, 1902 CE) and Husaam al-Haramayn (1324 AH) in which he passed the juridical verdict that the aforementioned writings were Kufr and presented it to the scholars of Haramayn (Makkah and Madinah) who wrote approvals [taqriz] for that fatwa. Read Fazil-e-Barelwi ‘Ulema-e-Hijaz ki Nazar Mein written by Prof. Dr. Mas’ud Ahmad for more details.

As a Faqih (jurist) and a Mufti, he wrote thousands of fatawa and answered all kinds of questions. Other Sunni contemporaries also rendered this service, but his rank was that of a spokesman for all of them. He was always at the forefront against false belief and anti-Islamic philosophies. He refuted the Wahabi sect and its offshoots with utmost brilliance and this is the reason why he became a target for many a false accusation. He writes himself in Tamhid e Iman:

“To deceive the public these people have contrived a scheme. They say, “What is the reliability of these scholars of Ahlus Sunnah? These people [Sunnis] make takfir on petty things. Their machines churn out only the decrees declaring people as infidels. They have ruled Isma’il Dihlawi, Molvi Ishaq, Molvi Abdul Hay as Kafirs” [here the imam implies that he has not said so].

And those without shame say that I have ruled Kafir – I seek Allah’s refuge – Shah Abdul Aziz, Shah Waliullah, Haji Imdadullah, Maulana Shah Fazlurrahman [all scholars of Ahlus Sunnah] and those beyond all boundaries of shame, say that I have ruled Kafir – I seek Allah’s refuge – that I have did Takfeer of Shaykh Mujaddid Alfi Thani rahimahullah [implying I have never said so].

They mention the names of whosoever the person they are talking to holds in great esteem. In fact some of them went to Maulana Muhammad Husain Ilahabadi and said that I have done Takfeer of – I seek Allah’s refuge – Shaykh al-Akbar Muhiyuddin ibn al-‘Arabi quddisa sirruhu! May Allah grant the Maulana an exalted place in paradise for he did not believe those liars. Rather he obeyed the verse: “If a fasiq comes to you with news, make sure of it” [investigate its truthfulness] and he wrote to me asking whether I had done so. I wrote to him back negating it in the form of a booklet by name, Inja al-Bari an Waswasil Muftari. When the Maulana read it he said “La hawla wa la quwwata illa billah”, warding off the deceit of these people.”[6]

“On the issue of Takfeer [ruling someone as an apostate], our stance has always been that, whosoever utters words of Kufr we shall not refrain from pronouncing Takfeer against them; whether they be Deobandi or Barelwi, follower of the League or the Congress, Nechari [naturalists] or Nadwi. On this issue we shall not differentiate whether someone is a friend or a foe.

This certainly does not mean that if one follower of the League utters a word of Kufr, all the followers of the League are Kafir; or if one Nadwi committed Kufr that all Nadwis are apostates. We do not declare all the residents of Deoband as Kafirs due to passages of Kufr written by some Deobandis.

We and our elders have repeatedly said that we do not decree any resident of Deoband or Lucknow as a kafir just because they live there. According to us, only that person is a kafir who commits insults against Allah, His Prophets and the chosen people of Allah and despite repeated warnings, does not repent. We also consider those people to be kafir who are aware of such Kufr and are aware of the clear meanings of these insults, and despite this they consider the insults to be the truth, the insulter to be a believer and their leader.

And that is it.

Apart from this, we do not declare anyone who claims to be a Muslim as an apostate. The number of people we have ruled as apostates are very few in number and restricted [to a specific issue]. Apart from these specific individuals, no Muslim from Deoband or Bareilly is termed an apostate. Neither are [Muslim] followers of the League or the Congress. We consider all Muslims to be exactly that – Muslims.”[7]

“Mere currency among common folk [úrf] is not sufficient to issue a ruling. Rather, rulings must take the real meanings of words into consideration. Therefore, a person who calls himself a Deobandi, is known by others as a Deobandi, believes these four Ulema-e-Deoband to be his leaders, even labels the Ahlus Sunnah as Bid’atis, but is not aware of the infamous statements of Kufr of these four scholars, then in reality he is not a Deobandi [who is ruled kafir]. Such a person is not ruled as a disbeliever or that performing his funeral prayer is disbelief. And Allah knows best.”[8]

Note by the translator: The reason why the shaykh says ‘he is not a Deobandi in reality’ is because in the fatwas of Imam Ahmed Raza and other prominent Sunni scholars, the tag ‘Deobandi’ is used for a specific group. People should not confuse this to accuse these scholars of indulging in blanket takfir. Allāh táālā knows best.

Nazeer-e-Muhammadi, Khatme Nubuwat and the Athar of Ibn Abbas continued and answering a question about these issues,

Maulana Mu-hammad Qasim Nanotwi

wrote a book named “Tahzeerun Naas” in which he wrote:

The common folk, the general populace thinks that the meaning of the saying ‘RasulAllah saws is the Seal’ means that his time is after the time of the earlier prophets and that he is the last of all the prophets. However, people of discerning know that there is no speciality in being earlier or later.

Suppose if there is a prophet born ever after the time of RasulAllah sallallahu alayhi wa sallam, there shall be no difference in his being the Seal. So it wouldn’t make any difference if there is a prophet in his own time on a different planet, or even on this very planet

“The meaning of Khatam al-Nabiyyin according to those who look at literal meanings is that the time of the Prophethood of Muhammad is after the time of the Prophethood of all other Prophets and that no other Prophet can come afterwards. However, you know that this is something in which there is neither praise nor any harm.” [1]

In reply to this book, Maulana Khalil Ahmad Anbethawi Saharanpuri wrote “Baraheen-e-Qati’ah” which was endorsed by Maulana Rasheed Ahmad Gangohi. This book contains a paragraph which compares the blessed knowledge of Rasoolullah sallallahu ‘alaihi wasallam with that of the accursed Iblis in such heart wrenching words. He writes:

“The end result: One should ponder that by looking at the state of Shaytan and the Angel of death, and proving [similar] knowledge that encompasses the earth to the Pride of the world Sallallahu `alayhi wa sallam without any documentary evidence and merely by wrong analogy – if this is not polytheism, then which part of belief is this?

Because such extensive [knowledge] for the Angel of death and Shaytan is proved from absolute evidence [nuSuS e qaTyi`ah]. Where is any such absolute evidence to prove the extensiveness of the knowledge of the Pride of the world, sallallahu `alayhi wa sallam which refutes all absolute documents in order to prove one polytheistic belief?”

Baraheen-e-Qati’ah was written in 1303 AH (1885 C.E.) and there was great displeasure to it.

The Ulema of the Ahlus Sunnah opposed it and in 1306 H (1888 C.E.), a debate took place in Bhawalpur (Punjab) which was organised by Nawab Muhammad Sadiq Abbasi (Nawab of Bhawalpur).

This was the place where Maulana Khalil Ahmad Anbethawi worked. Maulana Mahmood Hasan Deobandi (Shaykh al-Hind) and Maulana Khalil Ahmad Anbethawi argued in favour of Baraheen-e-Qati’ah and for the Ahlus Sunnah, Maulana Ghulam Dastagir Qasuri was the debater. Shaykh al-Mashaikh Hazrat Shah Ghulam Farid was the judge for the debate.

The whole debate has been published as

“Taqdees al-Wakeel ‘an Tauheen al-Rasheed wa al-Khalil”.

The debate was a written one and the argument of Maulana Dastagir was this:
“My objection is that you have denied the vast knowledge of the most knowledgeable of creation sallallahu ‘alaihi wasallam and have shown his knowledge to be less than that of Shaytan. This is disrespect of the worst kind.”[3]
Haji Imdadullah Muhajir Makki and Maulana Rahmatullah Kairanwi supported the Ulema of the Ahlus Sunnah and favouring the stance of Maulana Dastagir, they both signed the Taqdees al-Wakeel. After seeing the signatures of Maulana Rasheed Ahmad Gangohi in favour of Maulana Khalil Ahmad Anbethawi, Maulana Rahmatullah Kairanwi wrote in refutation:

“I used to think of Maulana Rasheed Ahmad as “Rasheed” but he turned out to be other than this. He has tried hard to prove the knowledge of Rasoolullah sallallahu ‘alaihi wasallam to be less than that of Shaytan and has called it Shirk to believe otherwise.” [4]

In 1319 AH- (1901 C.E), Maulana Ashraf Ali Thanwi answered a question regarding ‘Ilm-e-Ghayb and published it as “Hifzul Iman”. In this book, he has compared the knowledge of Rasoolullah sallallahu ‘alaihi wasallam or to show its size or smallness to madmen and animals and has said there is nothing unique to Rasoolullah sallallahu ‘alaihi wasallam regarding this knowledge. The actual paragraph is this:

“And then, if it is correct to attribute the knowledge of the unseen (ilm ghayb) to be possessed by RasûlAllâh Sallallahu alayhi wa sallam, as Zayd says, then it remains to be asked, which one he refers to. Is it only a ‘part’ of it (baáĎ) or ‘complete’; if he refers to ‘part’, then what is extraordinary about RasûlAllâh in possessing it? Such knowledge of unseen is also possessed by all and sundry (zayd,amr); even infants, lunatics and all the animals and quadrupeds.”

The paternal grandson of Hazrat Sayyid Muhammad Jilani Qadri Hyderabadi, SayyidNazeeruddin son of Sayyid Moinuddin, expresses his disgust at this statement:

“Some people brought the book, ‘Hifzul Iman’ by Ashraf Ali Thanwi to my grandfather (Sayyid Muhammad Jilani Qadri) and asked about it. He read the book and said, “Molvi Ashraf Ali has written an utmost disrespectful thing about ‘Ilm-e-Ghayb”.

A few days after this,Molvi Ashraf Ali was sitting in Makkah Masjid in Hyderabad. My grandfather stood and expressed his disgust at the book and said, “This paragraph stinks of Kufr.”

A few days later, there was gathering of Ulema at the house of Maulana Hafiz Muhammad Ahmad (son of Maulana Muhammad Qasim Nanotwi). Since he had great affection for my grandfather he invited him too. At the gathering, the Ulema expressed their views on the paragraph in Hifzul Iman. My grandfather mentioned the disgust he felt and presented a fatwa against the book.
Then, some days after this, my grandfather saw Sayyidina Rasoolullah sallallahu ‘alaihi wasallam in a dream. The dear Prophet sallallahu ‘alaihi wasallam expressed his happiness that my grandfather had refuted the book and had labelled it “Aqbah” (the most repugnant). Rasoolullah sallallahu ‘alaihi wasallam said, “I am happy with you. What do you wish for?” My grandfather replied that he wished that his remaining life would be spent in Madina and that he be buried in Madina. His wish was granted and he migrated to Madina thereafter. He spent ten years there and passed away there in 1364 AH. (1944 C.E) [5]

Hazrat Maulana Abul Khair Naqshbandi Mujaddidi Dihlawi was once resident in Kothi Ilahi Bakhsh, Meerut. During his stay, Hafiz Muhammad Ahmad, son of Maulana Muhammad Qasim Nanotwi, and Maulana Ashraf Ali Thanwi came to one of his gatherings.

A supporter of Maulana Ghulam Dastagir Qasuri read out the passage of Hifzul Iman. Hazrat Shah Abul Khair Dihlawi found it utterly displeasing and said:

“Is this service to the religion? Your elders were upon our path. Why did you oppose this?” Molvi Ashraf Ali Thanwi replied, “I have clarified this passage in another book of mine”. Shah Abul Khair answered, “So many people have diverged from the truth due to your book, what need remains of your clarification?”[6]

The beginning and the end of sectarianism is there for all to see.

Muhammad Husain (Raees Nahtor, Zila Bajnur) writes that when Shah Muhammad Isma’il Dihlawi reached Lucknow from Delhi with his supporters and began to preach his ideas:

“At the time, Maulana Abdur Rahman Wilayati was resident in Lucknow. He was famous for his miracles. Molvi Isma’il abstained from debate during this time. When he was about to leave, he said that the Ulema of Lucknow were very astray. He expressed his plan to return from Calcutta and do Jihad against these “astray” people. Molvi Abdur Rahman said, “My son! Whoever has intentions such as this does not return.”[7]

The ideology of Sayyid Ahmad Rae Barelwi and the writings of Shah Isma’il Dihlawi strayed away from the beliefs of the predecessors and the creed of Waliullahi family.

“As time passed by, due to dissent from the original creed, instead of becoming a national movement for the Muslims, the Waliullahi movement became a platform for religious sectarianism. When connected with Sayyid Ahmad Shaheed, naturally, this sectarianism occurred and the other section of this movement, the Deoband movement, also caused the same result. Even today, the vast majority of Muslims is Barelwi which does not consider the two abovementioned movements as being anything less than Kufr.”[8]

The religious sectarianism that occurred in India after 1240 AH / 1825 CE, the reasons for it and the people behind it have been mentioned briefly.

“It is a shame that due to this book (Taqwiyatul Iman) the Muslims of India who number 200 million, of which 90% are Hanafis, have been split into two groups.”[1]

Mawlānā Abul Kalam Azad writes:

“Mawlānā Muhammad Isma’il Shaheed was a classmate of Mawlānā Munawwaruddin. After the passing of Shah Abdul Aziz, when he wrote “Taqwiyatul Iman” and “Jilaul ‘Ainayn” and his creed spread throughout the land, all the scholars rose up against it. The person who refuted these books the most was Mawlānā Munawwaruddin who wrote several books and in 1240 AH, the famous dialogue happened at the Jamia Mosque of Delhi. All the scholars of India were asked to effect a ruling [fatwa] and thereafter a fatwa was also beseeched from the Haramayn.

From his writings it is evident that initially Maulana Munawwaruddin tried to convince Maulana Isma’il and his son-in-law Maulana Abdul Hay and their friends and tried all means to persuade them. However, when all his attempts came to nothing, he was forced to debate and refute. The famous debate at the Jamia Mosque of Delhi was organised where on one side were Maulana Isma’il and Maulana Abdul Hay and on the other side were Maulana Munawwaruddin and all the scholars of Delhi.[2]

“The answer to the first question concerning “Taqwiyatul Iman” – and I call it“Tafwiyatul Iman” (with the letter faa) – is that which I have written in a monograph refuting it named“Mu’eedul Iman”. Isma’il’s book is not only against the traditions of our family but it is against the Tawhid of all the Prophets and Messengers themselves! Because Prophets and Messengers are sent to teach the people and make them walk the path of Tawheed.

In this book however, there is no sign of that Tawhid nor the Sunnah of the Messengers. Things that are claimed as Shirk and Bid’ah in this book and taught to the people have not been labeled as such by any of the Prophets or their followers. If there is any proof otherwise, ask his followers to show it to us.

The answer to the fourth question

is that the Wahabi’s book [ibn Abdu’l Wahab Najdi] was the text and this is as if it’s commentary.

The answer to the fifth point

is that Shah Abdul Aziz was impaired by his poor-sight. When he heard about the book, he said that if he were not ill, he would have written a refutation similar to “Tuhfa Ithna Ashariya.”

It is the grace of Allah that I (Maulana Makhsoos Ullah) wrote a rebuttal of the commentary (Tafwiyatul Iman) by course of which the text (Kitab al-Tawhid) was also refuted. My father, Shah Rafiuddin, hadnot seen the book butwhenShah Abdul Aziz saw it and expressed his disapproval, I set out writing the refutation.”[3]
Let us have a look at another example of Shah Isma’il Dihlawi’s reformist nature and his free thinking.

Maulana Ashraf Ali Thanwi writes:

“Shah Is’haq narrates that when Molvi Isma’il started performing Rafa’ Yadain (raising hands in salah) Molvi Muhammad Ali and Molvi Ahmad Ali, who were both students of Shah Abdul Aziz, approached Shah Abdul Aziz and asked him to warn Molvi Isma’il against this as it would cause unnecessary confusion.

Shah Abdul Aziz replied that he had become too old and weak to participate in debates.

When Shah Abdul Qadir visited Shah Abdul Aziz, he was asked to tell Isma’il to abandon Rafa’ Yadain as it would cause confusion among the public. Abdul Qadir replied that he would advise Isma’il but feared that the latter will not listen and will counter by presenting hadith.
Hence, Shah Abdul Qadir asked Molvi Muhammad Ya’qub to ask Molvi Isma’il to abandon Rafa’ Yadain because it will cause unnecessary trouble among the masses. When Molvi Muhammad Ya’qub spoke to Molvi Isma’il, the latter replied ‘if one worries about troubling the masses, then what do you say about the hadith: “a person who revives a Sunnah in times of tribulation gets the reward of a hundred martyrs?”’ When an abandoned Sunnah is revived then there is bound to be opposition from the masses. Molvi Muhammad Ya’qub informed Shah Abdul Qadir of Molvi Isma’il’s reply to which Shah Abdul Qadir said:

“Oh, dear! We thought that Isma’il had become a scholar. But he has not understood the meaning of [even a simple] hadith. The hadith he quotes is for that action which contradicts the sunnah. In the matter of Rafa’ Yadain, we do not go against the Sunnah; because just as raising the hands [Rafa’ Yadain] is Sunnah, leaving them unraised is also [from another] Sunnah.”[4]

The contradiction and mistakes of Shah Isma’il Dihlawi in matters of belief (aqayid) and juridical mistakes caused many disputes among the Ulema. Most notably, the issue Imkan-e-Kadhib and Imkan-e-Nazeer-e-Muhammadi caused an uproar.

The scholars of Ahlu’s Sunnah have explained these two issues brilliantly precisely and in detail. The contentious passage written by Shah Isma’il Dihlawi that caused this friction goes thus:
The glory of that King is such that He can create a billion prophets, awliya, jinns, angels, Muhammad and Jibril in a single moment with just a ‘kun’ [the command ‘Be.’]
(tafwiyatu’l iman, pg.37)

‘Allama Fazle Haq Khairabadi, student of Shah Abdul Aziz Muhaddith Dihlawi, refuted this idea proving it was against the Shari’ah.

He wrote that according to the absolute proofs of the Qur’an and hadith, Prophet Muhammad sallallahu ‘alaihi wasallam is the last and final Prophet, there can be no other Prophet or Messenger after him. Conceiving another like the Prophet Muhammad is now an impossibility and from those aspects which is an impossibility according to the Shari’ah. To believe that there can be another Muhammad would necessitate that Allah did something apart from what He has stated in the Qur’an, that is, that Allah ta`ala has lied. Lying is a flaw and it is impossible for Allah to have a flaw. For a detailed discussion on the matter, refer to ‘Allama Fazle Haq Khairabadi’s Tahqeeq al-Fatwa fi Ibtal al-Taghwa.[5]

The book is has many proofs concerning the matter of ‘possibility of lying by Allah ta`ala’ and ‘Impossibility of another Muhammad to exist’ [Imkan-e-Kizb and Imkan-e-Nazeer-e-Muhammadi.]

Shah Isma’il Dihlawi wrote a monograph on this subject named “Yak Roza” and his student Maulana Haidar Ali Tonki provided support to his teacher’s motif.

As an answer to this, ‘Allama Fazle Haq Khairabadi wrote a book in Farsi (Persian) called “Imtina’un Nazeer” which was published by ‘Allama Sayyid Sulaiman Ashraf (President of Islamic Studies, Aligarh University) in 1908 from Jaunpur.

Maulana Ahmad Hasan Kanpuri (student of Mufti Muhammad Lutfullah Aligarhi and Khalifa of Haji Imdadullah Muhajir Makki) wrote a book on the topic of Imkan-e-Kizb called “Tanzeeh al-Rahman ‘an Shee’at al-Kadhibi wa al-Nuqsan”.

Using theAtharof Ibn-e-Abbas as evidence, they not only believed that having Prophet’s like Adam, Nuh, Ibrahim, Musa, Isa ‘alayhimu’s salam and Muhammad sallallahu `alaihi wasallam was possible, they even believed that this was actually the case.

Prof. Muhammad Ayyub Qadri (Karachi) writes:

“It is important to point out that the Ulema of Bareilly and Badayun strongly opposed and disagreed with Maulana Muhammad Ahsan’s (Nanotwi) viewpoint. In Bareilly, the foremost in opposition was Maulana Naqi Ali Khan and in Badayun it was Maulana Abdul Qadir, the son of Maulana Fazle Rasool Badayuni.[8]

Maulana Abdul Haq Khairabadi, Maulana Sayyid Husain Muhaddith Rampuri, Maulana Abdul Ali Rampuri, Mufti Noorun Nabi Rampuri and other Ulema of the Ahlus Sunnah opposed the Atharof Ibn Abbas,proving it to be against the Qur’an and a false belief.

Hazrat Mufti Irshad Husain Rampuri wrote that believing in it is against the creed of Ahlu’s Sunnah. Because Khatam al-Nabiyyinmeans The final Prophet – that is Muhammad sallallahu ‘alaihi wasallam.[9]

All Praises is due to Almighty Allah SubHanuhu wa Ta’ala, Peace and Blessings be upon the most perfect of creations, His Beloved Habeeb, Sayyiduna Rasoolullah SallAllaho Alaihi wa Sallam his noble Family and the illustrious Sahaba Ridwanullahi Ta’ala Alaihim Ajma’een and all the pious servants of Almighty Allah SubHanuhu wa Ta’ala.

The religion of Islam gave women an honorable status and true dignity. Before the advent of Islam, women had no rights of any kind, or an independent identity in any form. The great importance of the Muslim woman’s role – whether as wife, sister, or daughter, and the rights that are due to her and the rights that are due from her – have been explained in the Glorious Qur’an, and further details of this have been explained in the purified Sunnah.

With the advent of Islam came the verse from the Qur’an condemning those who practiced female infanticide: “And when one among of them receives the glad tidings of a daughter, his face turns black for the day, and he remains seething. Hiding from the people because of the evil of the tidings; “Will he keep her with disgrace, or bury her beneath the earth?”; pay heed! Very evil is the judgment they impose!” [Surah an-Nahl : 58/59]

The Holy Qur’an makes no distinction between man and woman as regards to the fundamental human rights. Here we may specifically state that woman, like man, is the possessor of free personality, and enjoys equality with man, in respect of:

Her spiritual and moral status:

The Qur’an says: “…Unto men the benefit of what they earn (of virtue) and unto women the benefit of what they earn (of virtue)” [Surah al-Nisa : 32]

i.e. in matters of spiritual grace both, man and woman, enjoy equal status and are independent of one another. A woman’s responsibility in faith is exactly the same as that of a man. Women are to pray, fast, give charity, perform the pilgrimage and perform other forms of Ibadah. A woman is rewarded for this just like a man. A woman must believe in the Oneness of Almighty Allah, the Books of Almighty Allah , the Angels of Almighty Allah, the Prophets of Almighty, the Day of Resurrection, the Day of Judgment and Heaven and Hell, and Predestination.

Her economic rights:

The Qur’an says: “Unto the men (of a family) belongs a share of that which parents and near kindred leave, and unto the women a share of that which the parents and near kindred leave, whether it be little or much – a legal share.” [Surah al-Nisa : 7]

Her legal rights:

The Qur’an says: “…And they (women) have rights similar to those (of men) over them, according to what is equitable…” [Surah al-Baqarah : 228]

Islam ensured a dignified life to the fair sex, which was hitherto treated in an unfair manner. Woman became the mistress of the household. Man was not allowed to beat or manhandle them nor deprive them of their share in the property. The Holy Qur’an declared: “A mother should not be made to suffer because of her child, nor he to whom the child is born (be made to suffer) because of his child (because both are equal before the law)…” [Surah al-Baqarah : 233]

Her right for gaining the Knowledge:

Islam has made it a duty on every Muslim male and female to gain knowledge, which is considered to be a superior act of worship in Islam. In Islam, therefore both men and women are credited with the capacity for learning, understanding and teaching. Knowledge is not only limited to the religious knowledge but includes all forms of knowledge. Acquiring knowledge will enable Muslim women and men to get a better perception and understanding of the world around them and make them more conscious of Almighty Allah SubHanuhu wa Ta’ala.

Conclusion:

The status of Muslim women as defined in Islam is very important because women make up half of society and they are responsible for nurturing, guidance and reformation of the subsequent generations of men and women. It is the female who imbues principles and faith into the souls of the nation. Indeed, the Muslim woman is the initial teacher in building a righteous society. Islam brought a new lease of life to women. Islam elevated the status of women to great heights so high that she stood shoulder to shoulder with man. In the Islamic family, the role of men and women is complementary rather than competitive. Their duties are described as equal in importance but not identical in substance.

Now, the issue of feminism in Islam is meaningless. The coming of Islam has brightened the life and future of women, in which Islam has lifted up their level. Islam upholds women to the highest and most respected position.

I hope my effort will be appreciated and my sisters in faith will surely remember me in their prayers for peace and prosperity, health and happiness and Allah’s SubHanuhu wa Ta’ala Mercy and Favour. May Almighty Allah SubHanuhu wa Ta’ala, through the Waseela of Sayyiduna Rasoolullah SallAllaho Alaihi wa Sallam accept this humble effort; and may He SubHanuhu wa Ta’ala give us the Toufeeq and Hidayah to restore the true rights to our Muslim women as dictated by Islam. Aameen!!

N.B.: I do not intend to restrict the readership of this note to sisters only; brothers also can benefit from this note. May Almighty Allah’s blessings be always with us and our families. Aameen!!

From the very beginning, the Muslims of India have been affiliated with the Hanafi school of Sunni thought. In Malabar and Konkan [1] there is a small number of Sunni Shafi’i Muslims and in some areas of the country there are small communities of Shi’ites.

Sectarianism within the Muslims of India began in the first quarter of the nineteenth century. In particular, the following (taqleed) of the four Imams of fiqh was made an issue of contention and to a lesser extent, tasawwuf was also made a target for division. <?XML:NAMESPACE PREFIX = O />

Taqleed and Tasawwuf were portrayed as innovations of misguidance and on these grounds many new sects came into existence that moved away from the Ahlu’s Sunnah wa’l Jama’ah.

To look at these facts in light of historic evidence, two excerpts are presented.

The first is by Hakeem Abdul Hayy Rae Barelwi and the second by Sulaiman Nadwi, a student of Mawlānā Shibli Nu’mani.‎‎

(1) According to some people, the taqleed of an Imam in issues of fiqh is impermissible and haram. They believe that those rulings that are evident in the Qur’an and Sunnah should be followed and in fiqhi issues, Qiyas (analogy) and Ijma’ (consensus) hold no weight.

One group has extreme opinions with regards to taqleed and they are adamant that it is forbidden. They consider muqallideen (followers of an Imam) to be slaves of the nafs (ego) and amongst the Ahlu’l Bid’ah.

They are so forceful with their opinion that they denigrate the four Imams and in particular Imam Abu Hanifah. This is the school to which Shaykh Abdul Haq Banarasi bin Fazlullah and Shaykh Abdullah Siddiqi Ilahabadi and others belong.

The first advocates taqleed based on research and evaluation. For example, Mulla Bahrul Uloom Abdul Ali bin Mulla Nizamuddin, the author of “Arkan-e-Arba’a” and Mawlānā Abdul Hayy Farangi Mahalli bin Abdul Haleem, the author of “Al-Ta’leeq al-Mumajjad.”

The other group of Hanafis are those that stick staunchly to taqleed and do not tolerate anything against it. For example, Mawlānā Shaykh Fazl-e-Rasool Amawi Badayuni and his followers. [1]

(2)Mawlānā Rasheed Ahmad Gangohi and Mawlānā Qasim Nanotwi
(founder of Darul Uloom Deoband)
are amongst the top students of

Shah Abdul Ghani Mujaddidi.

In Purab,Mawlānā Shah Isma’il’s student are Mawlānā Sakhawat Ali Jaunpuri and others. This group is characterised by its claim of refutating Bid’ah and ‘pure’ Tawhid alongside its adherence to the Hanafi madhab.

His group is characterised not only by its claim of ‘Pure Tawhid’ and refutation of Bid’ah; but also its distancing from Hanafi fiqh. Instead, they call for derivation of rulings directly from books of hadith whatever one can and then act upon it. This group came to be known as

“Ahl e Hadith”.

The third group was that which stuck staunchly upon its old traditions and continued to call itself the
“Ahlu’s Sunnah”.
The leaders of this group were mostly the Ulama of Bareilly and Badayun.[2]

According to Hakeem Abdul Hay Rae Barelwi and Sulaiman Nadwi, the group that stuck staunchly to taqleed, remained upon its old traditions and called itself:

“Ahlu’s Sunnah”

constituted of Ulema who were from Bareilly and Badayun. Even today, they will not accept anything apart from taqleed and remaining upon old ways.

The Split

Abdur Rahman Parwaz Islahi and Prof. Muhammad Ayyub Qadri

portray this sectarian split in their own words.

(1) The students of Hazrat Shah Abdul Aziz Muhaddith Dihlawi were made up one group that remained upon his creed and did not tolerate anything against the issues of Shari’ah. However, the other group pressed for the abandonment of taqleed and called for Ijtihad. Hence, slowly but surely, disagreement appeared on certain issues between the two groups.[3]

(2) Awadh produced some brilliant thinkers. In the latter days, Mawlānā Fazle Haq Khairabadi was the most exceptional of them all. Apart from his father, Mawlānā Fazle Imam, he also benefited from the Waliyullah family.

However, he sternly disagreed with many of the beliefs of Shah Isma’il and Shah Is’haq and remained steadfast upon his traditions.

Mawlānā Mahboob Ali Dihlawi (student of Shah Abdul Aziz Muhaddith Dihlawi) belonged to the same creed. Mawlānā Fazle Haq and Mawlānā Mahboob Ali refuted the ideas of Shah Isma’il strongly. The Ulema of Bareilly and Badayun helped them in this cause.[4]

The opinions of Muhammad Ja’far Thanesari and Mawlānā Thanaullah Amratsari are much closer to the truth and are helpful in arriving at correct conclusions:

(1) During my time in India (1280 AH, 1864 CE) I believe, there were not even ten individuals in the whole of Punjab that followed the Wahabi creed. And now (1302 AH, 1884 CE) I see that there is no town or city in which at least one in four people are Wahabi who follow the creed of Muhammad Isma’il.[5]
(2) In Amritsar, the Muslim and non-Muslim populations are equal. Eighty years ago, nearly all Muslims followed that creed which is today called “Hanafi Barelwi”.[6]

Mawlānā Thanaullah Amratsari, editor of the periodical Majallah Ahle Hadith, said this in 1973. According to him, 165 years ago, the Muslim population of Amritsar, Punjab, followed the same creed as those that are known today as “Hanafi Barelwi” and according to Muhammad Ja’far Thanesri, 200 years ago, there was no sign of any Wahabi or follower of Shah Isma’il Dihlawi in the whole of [undivided] Punjab!

After Siraj-ul-Hind Shah Abdul Aziz Muhaddith Dihlawi

(d. 1239 AH, 1823 CE),

various people strayed from the Sunni Hanafi creed and adopted non-Madhabism which divided the Muslims of India.

Shah Isma’il Dihlawi’s “Taqwiyatul Iman” epitomised their views and was supposed to strengthen belief in Tawhid. About this book, Mawlānā Ashraf Ali Thanwi writes what Shah Isma’il Dihlawi himself thought of his book:

“I have written this book and I know that there are harsh words in some places and extremist views in certain other places. For example, some actions which are hidden polytheism [Shirk-e-Khafi], I have labelled it as manifest polytheism [Shirk-e-Jali.] I fear that there will be an outrage for these reasons. If I were here, I would have published its contents over an eight or ten year period. However, at this moment, my plan is to go to Hajj and thereafter, go on Jihad. Therefore, it is not possible to spread publication over eight or ten years. I also see that no one else will do this job so I published the book all at once eventhough there will be outrage due to it, though I feel that it will subside over time.”[7]

Harsh language could be a writer’s habit but how did the author of Taqwiyatul Iman gain the authority to label Shirk-e-Khafi as Shirk-e-Jali?

His expectation of causing an outrage was certainly fulfilled but the division of Muslims has not healed unto this day.